Proving that a vector field is conservative

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that a vector field is conservative, specifically focusing on the relationship between the vector field and its potential function, denoted as ##\phi##. Participants are exploring the implications of integrating the vector field and the conditions under which ##\phi## can be determined.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the process of finding the potential function ##\phi## by integrating the vector field ##F##. There are inquiries about the role of constants of integration and how they relate to the function's dependence on other variables. Questions arise regarding the differentiation of ##\phi## and the implications of constants during integration.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants seeking clarification on specific steps in the integration process and the relationship between the potential function and the vector field. Some guidance has been offered regarding the integration approach, but there remains a lack of consensus on certain aspects of the differentiation and the role of constants.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of integrating vector fields and the assumptions regarding constants of integration, particularly how they may vary with respect to other variables in the context of conservative fields.

JD_PM
Messages
1,125
Reaction score
156

Homework Statement



Screenshot (236).png


Homework Equations



$$F = \nabla \phi$$

The Attempt at a Solution



Let's focus on determining why this vector field is conservative. The answer is the following:

Screenshot (238).png

Screenshot (239).png

[/B]
I get everything till it starts playing with the constant of integration once the straightforward differential equations have been solved.

May you explain how does it conclude that ##\phi (x, y, z)## is a potential for ##F##?

Thanks.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot (235).png
    Screenshot (235).png
    1.6 KB · Views: 332
  • Screenshot (236).png
    Screenshot (236).png
    6 KB · Views: 684
  • Screenshot (237).png
    Screenshot (237).png
    2.6 KB · Views: 331
  • Screenshot (238).png
    Screenshot (238).png
    19.8 KB · Views: 929
  • Screenshot (239).png
    Screenshot (239).png
    4.4 KB · Views: 441
Physics news on Phys.org
You want to find ##\phi## by integrating ##F##. You start by integrating with respect to ##x##, which tells you about the function form of ##\phi## with respect to ##x##, up to a constant ##C_1##, which is a constant wrt ##x## but can be a function of ##y## and ##z##. You then find how ##C_1## changes with ##y## by integrating over ##y##, and so on.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: JD_PM
DrClaude said:
You want to find ##\phi## by integrating ##F##. You start by integrating with respect to ##x##, which tells you about the function form of ##\phi## with respect to ##x##, up to a constant ##C_1##, which is a constant wrt ##x## but can be a function of ##y## and ##z##. You then find how ##C_1## changes with ##y## by integrating over ##y##, and so on.

But I do not understand why ##\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial y} = \frac{\partial C_1}{\partial y}##
 
At that point in the solution, what is ##\phi## equal to? What do you get when you differentiate it with respect to ##y##?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: JD_PM

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K